2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

Preamble

A huge gap since my last post - I've simply been very busy - swanning off to South Africa and so on. Still, back to it. I'm watching this out of order because it happened to be the next one I got from LoveFilm.

What I already knew

Quite a lot really. I've seen the film a couple of times, and read the book (and the sequels) quite a few more times than that. So I really know the story quite well, and while there are some differences between the book and the film, these are really quite minor. So there were no real surprises for me here, but I tried to watch it with fresh eyes.

Review

This film starts quite slowly, and in fact moves quite slowly all the way through. What really stands out is that there is no dialogue for almost the fist 30 minutes of the film. The initial sequence covers a group of apes in pre-history, and and their interaction with a strange monolith that appears one day.

The apes are less realistic than I remember, but possibly quite good for the time the film was made. I think the film suffers in comparison to the book in this sequence, as it's not exactly clear what is happening There are a couple of jarring moments when there seem to be very hard cuts with sudden changes in noise or music, but generally it's not badly done. What was quite disappointing for me was the transition to the second section of the film, which is held up as quite an iconic piece of film-making. The concept is very striking - a spinning bone transitioning to a spaceship - but the execution is actually pretty amateurish to my eye, the bone spins in two different directions, and the cut is to a static spaceship. I'm just not sure why it is so highly praised. Still.

The second section of the film is really the exposition for the third sequence, and follows Dr Heywood Floyd (William Sylvester) as he travels to the moon to report on the progress of an investigation into another monolith that has appeared on the moon. The physical presentation of space travel looks a bit dated now, but visually it is very stylish and consistent, and there is some nice use of music - I particularly liked the use of dance music to cover the spaceship docking. Then, in really the only surprise for me, Leonard Rossiter appears - I had completely forgotten that he was in it. Floyd goes to the moon, there are some dodgy attempts at low-gravity effects, and some quite jarring exposition explaining what happened 'at the beginning' to Floyd (which I'm sure he would have known anyway). Then the monolith is visited, and we transition to the third section.

This section follows Dave Bowman (Keir Dullea) and Frank Poole (Gary Lockwood) as they go about life on a spaceship travelling to Jupiter, controlled by the on-board computer - HAL9000. HAL is really the central character of this part of the film, and was given a great presence, even though he is simply a block panel with a red light, and a disembodied voice (which is very well delivered). The depiction of space travel in this section is much better, in my opinion, to the previous section, although there are a couple of sequences which look a bit off. The plot really comes alive when things go wrong, Frank is killed and Dave is forced to de-activate HAL. This is all done with very little dialogue. Frank dies in silence, and HAL fades out singing 'Daisy, daisy...' which is another iconic scene. It's a very atmospheric section of the film, and does begin to show why the film is highly regarded.

Then, frankly, it all goes nuts and Dave spends what feels like ages going through some weird 60s acid trip journey with lots of flashing lights and general oddness, until he ends up in a room where he lives, ages, and dies all in one long very cleverly blended sequence, only to be confronted with the monolith again, and becomes a 'Star Child'

This is where I have the advantage, having read the books, I understand a fair bit of what is going on here, but I can imagine for people who have only seen the film, this whole sequence must be pretty confusing.

Overall, I enjoyed this, although perhaps not as much as I expected. It certainly caught my attention, and created a space of its own, a mood and an atmosphere, and when the end credits came on, it was a little jerk back to reality as I had almost forgotten I was watching a film - which is probably a sign of a good movie I guess. Kubrick presents the story beautifully, and does so without it being obvious what he is doing. I'm not sure I would have enjoyed it as much without the knowledge form the books, but that's probably my fault. It's a great presentation, I'm just not sure that the plot is made clear. But then maybe that's the idea - Kubrick was never one to do things normally :)

Rating: rent it (then buy it if you like it)

Mrs Worm's opinion

She didn't watch it

Useful links

IMDB | Roger Ebert | MRQE

...Read more

A Hard Day's Night (1964)

Preamble

This is going to be a hard review to write. Not only is this the first film on the list that I have seen before (a few times if I'm honest), I am also a big fan of The Beatles so I am going to have to work hard to seperate my impressions of the band and their music from those of the film. My apologies in advance if I don't succeed. The problem is slightly eased by the fact that the music and film were really developed together, and need to be treated as a single item in many ways.

What I already knew

Quite a lot really. I've seen A Hard Day's Night previously, and as a Beatles fan I know a fair bit of the history, so this is far from unknown territory for me. Most notable for me is probably the fact that I really didn't expect to see this film on the list; I had never considered it in terms of a film before, concentrating more on the music.

Review

How else could this film open other than with that iconic first chord from A Hard Day's Night (the song)? The amount of debate about exactly what the chord is frankly boggles the mind, and either demonstrates the brilliance of The Beatles, or shows obsession gone mad. You decide.

The opening scene of John, George and Ringo running down the road really sets the mood for the film, especially when George falls over (probably due to running while keeping one hand in his pocket...fool!) which actually looks quite painful. A Hard Day's Night is not scared of making The Beatles looking a bit foolish, which is quite refreshing. It also doesn't look scripted, and possibly exposes a 'real' glimpse of the boys, which is something that continues throughout the film.

To digress slightly, one thing I have been struggling with a bit so far in watching the films on my list is that it's hard to view them in the context of the time they were made. In the case of A Hard Day's Night I find this slightly easier because of what I know about the band, and it is worth bearing in mind that the film was made relatively early in The Beatles career. This was 1964 - about a year after they really made it big, and only a couple of years before they basically stopped playing live and became a studio band.

Once the opening 'chase' scene is over, you soon realise that as actors, The Beatles make very good musicians. That said, the timing is very good in places - particularly from John Lennon, and there are some great one-liners. The film is basically a vehicle for the the songs, but actually stands on its own in many ways. It's really a mixture of styles - some which were quite progressive for the time, and some which were more traditional. There are some great comedic moments - such as John Lennon in the bath, and some great performances; the sequence of And I Love Her really stood out for me.

The style and mood of the film moves around quite a lot ad and feels quite experimental at times, and while this could easily be confusing and result in a real mess; the whole thing hangs together very well. Probably what stand out the most are the scenes of screaming girls, pulling their hair and wailing at their favourite Beatle. While these images have become something of a cliche, from speaking to my mother who saw them live, and retains fond memories of the time - that is exactly what it was like.

Clearly, this film doesn't make any great statments about life, and it was never intended to. My impression is that it was simply another marketing tool, but one that managed to utilise a talented director and four great 'ordinary' lads to create something unique. I don't think I can truly separate my admiration for The Beatles from the film, but perhaps that is not the point. The energy genuinely carries you along, and it's a very quick 90 minutes.

Overall, it's a film I could watch several times without getting bored. The dialogue is sparse in places, but cutting and intelligent as well, which makes for some great moments.

Rating: Buy it

Mrs Worm's Opinion

"They're not very good actors" (she's not wrong)

...Read more